My initial discussion with "V" and "P" went really well. "P" was specific regarding the requirement and the discussion was crisp. The expectations were properly and correctly set. I appreciate the friendly approach "P" took with the discussion as it is rarely seen now a days. Thank you "P".
I had a very good and detailed discussion with "H" too in the second round and was very positive regarding my feedback. "H" expressed concerns If I would be able to manage a team of 35 people successfully as the largest team I had handled directly is 15 in count. I clearly stated my capabilities to "H" and also presented a real life experience where I not only worked and managed my Wipro colleagues but also team members from other Vendors (Accenture, Infosys & Sapient) working at client location in Germany. In my opinion I did well.
I received a feedback from "V" in a few hours which stated that I am not shortlisted because “H is looking for a project manager who has handled a team of around 35 people and not 15”. I have 2 questions here:
- Is the difference between 35 people and 15 people that much significant that it becomes a deciding factor in a candidate’s selection? I would not ask this if it was between 1000 and 15.
- If 35 was such an important number, don’t you think it should have been clearly stated in the JD so that I could myself walk out of the opportunity?
The very first page in my resume clearly states what kind and count of team I am managing currently. Shouldn’t the interviewer have a look around a candidate’s resume before the interview? If count was such a crucial factor, why not reject me in the beginning of the interview instead of discussion multiple other things for almost an hour?
I still appreciate and thank "V" for the swift interview process and prompt feedback. It is not that I cannot take rejection. I have been rejected more number of times than I have been selected. But I at least deserve a proper justification for the same.